What makes Star Trek

 

What I consider the fundamentals of any Star Trek series: 

• a positive vision of the future for humanity (not a dystopian future)
• To quote Gene Roddenberry: “In the future there will be no hunger, there will be no greed and every child will know how to read”. (Greed is seen by others like the Feringi, the Orion Syndicate, etc)
• Star Trek needs to be a show the whole family can watch together. It might even generate some insightful family discussions. 
• Violence can be referenced but not seen. Certainly no murder or violent acts will be undertaken by Starfleet officers. 
• Profanity is in the past. Humanity (particularly Starfleet officers) speak with respect, even when in disagreement 
• There is alway a fundamental respect for all life. 
• “To explore strange new worlds. To seek out new life and new civilizations. To boldly go where no one has gone before”
• Try to respect and work with established continuity 

Some of my issues with Star Trek: Discovery and Star Trek: Picard is that Alex Kurtzman and company tend to ignore the fundamentals of Star Trek listed above. 

My main issues with modern Star Trek are:

• It’s too dark. The entire look of modern Trek is poorly lit, dark and brooding. DS9 wasn’t even this dark and it had previously been known as the ‘dark’ Trek. 
• Children cannot and should not watch modern Star Trek. It is unwatchable for children due to the profanity, violence and sexual innuendos (brother-sister duo Narek and Narissa. The sexual tension was very implied. I actually thought they were going to kiss on the STP finale). Trek used to be a family show, now the lowest rating might be 13+. 
• Countless lense flares. Why do we need so many lense flares? I guess they think it gives the show a cinematic feel...I just find them annoying to see
• the unnecessary use of profanity. Trek never needed it’s characters to be dropping f-bombs or ‘shit’ or ‘asshole’ in their lines. (Yes Data did say “oh shit” in ST:Generations and Kirk said “Double damn ass on you” in ST4. Those were rare exceptions done for comedic effect. They were not the norm)
• Violence. The opening scene of episode 5 of STP was more like a scene from a “Saw” movie than that of a Star Trek production. It was done for shock & awe, a cheap gimmick not the standard in past Trek. (Again there were a few very rare exceptions like Commander Remicks death scene in the TNG episode ‘Conspiracy’). 
• Ignoring continuity established in previous Star Trek shows (Data had a human brother? Spock had a human foster sister? Why do Klingons look like orcs from ‘Lord of the Rings’?)
• Ignoring their own continuity, sometimes between episodes. (In STP Agnes straight up murders Bruce Maddox, she is later told by Picard she will be arrested yet by the end of the season she’s NOT arrested. Another example: STP Ep9 they establish that androids can always tell when someone is lying. Agnes passes the lie test, but then in Ep10 it turns out she WAS lying after all ...?? Also the ‘Zhat Vash’ was a super secret romulan sect of the Tal’Shiar no one heard about as established in STP ep2. But by the end of season one it seems everyone knows about them...)
• New Trek seems to be borrowing concepts from other established sci-fi franchises. Examples: tardigrades, flesh and blood synthetics (Battlestar Galactica), a distant future where a single starship needs to rebuild a Federation-like organization (Andromeda), space Vegas (STP Ep5: Blade Runner), etc. 
• Unrealistic science/technobabble (Rick Sternbach’s technobabble lines from TNG/DS9/VOY, which were based on real life power engineering, have now been replaced with lines like “Crypto Kung Fu” in STP)
• MacGuffins to help get characters out of situations (time crystals, tardigrades/spore drive, a device that can fix or do anything with the power of imagination...)
• Mary Sue characters (Michael Burnham is a Mary Sue. She literally committed mutiny on DSC’s first episode which started a war with the Klingons and got her Captain killed & eaten, not to mention thousands of others killed. Then at the end of the season she is awarded a medal and her Starfleet commission is reinstated. She literally can do anything and all is forgiven)
• Bad writing. Star Trek used to be a show where each episode had a beginning, middle, climax and conclusion; with the exception of the occasional 2-part episode. Even DS9 with its long story arcs still followed this format while at the same time having their over arching storylines. Modern Trek has episodes with no conclusion, long drawn out narratives and long storylines that flow at a snails pace or jarringly fast. Example: on season 1 of STP it took Admiral Picard until the end of episode 3 to actually embark on his mission. Then everything was hurriedly concluded in the last 2 episodes. And as a result of a hurried conclusion certain plot points were missed such as: Seven and Raffi getting romantic? Agnes has gotten away with murder? Why was the Data consciousness reveal not revealed prior to the end of the final episode? Rios tried to blow up Soji with a bomb but all is forgiven? Why would Starfleet end the ban on synths after they literally tried to end all humanoid life in the galaxy? Also if these all powerful ancient synths were summoned wouldn’t they still come anyway despite Soji destroying the portal transmitter? (I could go on but I’ll stop here)

 

To be clear my issues with modern Star Trek DO NOT include the following:

• Gay characters. I fully support the LGBT community and I applaud modern Trek for having gay characters on the shows. This is something Gene Roddenberry wanted to do with TOS and TNG but was denied by the higher ups at the time. 
• Diversity. Star Trek has always been diverse but for some reason Modern Star Trek defenders (Drekkies) claim that anyone who doesn’t like their DSC or STP hate diversity. It’s always been there folks, it’s always made Star Trek special and I applaud modern Trek for continuing this tradition. 

 

 

 

But I think another huge problem with modern Star Trek is how it’s delivered. DSC & STP are available for viewing if you pay for CBS All Access (thankfully Star Trek is still free on tv in Canada. But I do pay a satellite bill so it’s not completely free). With new Trek they want more subscribers for CBS All Access so they need to create buzz to attract new viewers whom would not buy into this just for Star Trek; they need previously non-Star Trek fans to subscribe. So what better way to attract new or ‘modern’ viewers than creating some buzz:

“They say ‘fuck’ on Star Trek now!”

“They literally ripped a guys eye out of his head! He was screaming and everything! It’s like watching’Saw’!”

“Klingons look like orcs now! Scary as hell!”

So they are trying to create buzz to create interest and in turn create new customers for their streaming platform. Problem is by ignoring the fundamentals of what makes Star Trek so special they are alienating a large number of their previous fan base. So in an effort to attract new customers they are losing customers. But are they attracting enough new viewers to make losing established fans a viable business practice? It doesn’t seem so in my view, established Trek fans are checking out and not as many checking in. 

Bottom line is this: I’m not against trying new things with Star Trek, but if it’s too radically different from previous Trek you are going to divide the fan base. And that’s what is happening now and it’s not good. Fans are fighting, “new” viewers are not coming to new Trek in great numbers and Star Trek is suffering as a result. 

Star Trek had a winning formula which is why it previously lasted 28 television seasons (TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT). 

If it’s not broken don’t fix it! 

And in a world filled with fighting, disease, hopelessness and so on; we could use a little ‘positive vision of the future’ to aspire to. 

Star Trek Fans Explained

Star Trek Fans Explained

 

I have been a fan of ‘Star Trek’ for almost my entire 40 years of being on this planet. I consider myself a Trekkie or Trekker, either label works for me but for some they get offended if you use one or the other. I’ve also had the pleasure (and sometimes displeasure) of meeting other ‘Star Trek’ fans. With all this knowledge of Trek fandom I have broken the fandom down to these categories, and these categories can be used for other fandoms.

·         The ‘Discriminating’ fan

If it’s good I’ll like it. If its hot garbage I’ll leave it where I found it and not bother. (I fall into this camp). If people ask my opinion I will be honest.

·         The ‘I love everything Star Trek no matter what!’ fan

As long as the words ‘Star Trek’ are there or logo’s/actors associated with ‘Star Trek’ there these fans will LOVE IT no matter what!  They will also defend it to their dying breath no matter how wrong they are to the rest of the world. CBS/Paramount could literally put dog crap in bags, put a ‘Star Trek’ logo on it with a letter of authenticity stating that this is ‘Authentic dog Poop from Captain Archer’s dog’ and these fans will buy it, love it and brag to all their friends and family about how much they love this franchise.

·         ‘This is shiny and new so it’s better ‘ fan

We all know that someone who loves something just because it is brand new. It looks good, sounds good so it must be good right?

 “Benedict Cumberbatch’s ‘Khan’ in the 2013 film ‘Star Trek into Darkness’ is better than the original because he’s new! Forget that Ricardo guy, he was so 1967….”

·         The traditionalist   (“My Star Trek is better than yours” fan)

For this fan ‘Star Trek’ was and still is what came before. People whom got their start on TOS believe it is the best. People whom started with TNG believe it is the best and so on. Every other Trek that followed (or came before depending if it was TNG or later where they got their start) is inferior to their favourite Star Trek.

·         The ‘Fake’ fan

These fans annoy me the most.  The fake fan is someone who pretends to like ‘Star Trek’ but doesn’t actually or hasn’t actually watched or payed attention to it. One lady whom I met at a convention dressed in a Starfleet uniform as it turns out doesn’t watch the show. She informed me she simply enjoys hanging out with all “these people”. She’s there for the party and not because she actually cares for the franchise and she is not alone. I met another guy at the same convention at an after party and he laughed at me when I asked what show was his favourite.

“I don’t fuckin watch that shit!” was his response.

When I asked him “Then why are you here? This is a Star Trek convention after all?”

“I’m just here for the party” was his reply as he attempted to teach the poor young woman whom was with him how to 2-step (country music dancing).  He also wasn’t much of a dancer either….

·          “Pew Pew” Star Trek should be more like ‘Star Wars’ fan

Star Trek was supposed to be a positive vision of the future. The characters of Star Trek were always intended to find diplomatic and peaceful solutions to their issues and only use violence as a last resort. Star Wars on the other hand violence is expected; hence why “WARS” is in the title. During wars you will have fighting and violence and that is the expected normal. But there are some Trekkers out there that want fighting, phaser fights, hand to hand combat, etc. in their Star Trek. They don’t want to see a peaceful diplomatic solution: they want a fight!

-          In the first episode of season 2 of ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ we see Captain Pike, Michael Burnham and two other Enterprise officers piloting fighter crafts through an asteroid field shooting their phasers… it was then they jumped the shark to become more like ‘Star Wars’ than ‘Star Trek’…

 

In my opinion as a lifelong fan of Star Trek my advice to you is like what you like and leave the rest. If you don’t like what JJ Abrams is doing with the newest films or what Alex Kurtzman is doing with ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ or ‘Star Trek: Picard’ just don’t watch them. I know I’ve stopped watching ‘Discovery’ and I’m still watching ‘Picard’, there is no set rule stating that you have to love and watch EVERYTHING ‘Star Trek’. Along with dropping ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ half way through season 2 I also have only ever watched half of the episodes of ‘Voyager’ and I’ve only seen 2 episodes from the 3^rd season of ‘Enterprise’. Back in those days I also was not happy with the creative choices they were making at that time so I simply stopped watching. In fact I know I wasn’t the only one as evident in the fact ‘Enterprise’ was cancelled after season 4 due to low ratings…

Aside from being a Trekkie I am also a comic book fan. There are certain characters and titles I’m drawn to because they are my favourites. But from time to time a new creative team will take over a title or character that I like and change up the status quo to something I do not like or agree with. Rather than sticking with that character or title I’ll move on to another book. Why waste my time and money on something I’m not enjoying? The same applies to ‘Star Trek’. I may not be enjoying or agreeing with what they are doing on ‘Discovery’, but that doesn’t mean I’m never going to go back and watch another new ‘Star Trek’. Maybe this rumoured ‘Captain Pike’ series will be better! Or maybe not...

But I do know a Michelle Yeoh ‘Section 31’ series will not be good. We do not need ‘Star Trek’ to be dark; it is after all supposed to be a “positive vision of the future” according to original series creator Gene Roddenberry.

 

Confessions of a Trekkie

For as long as I remember I have been a ‘Star Trek’ fan. It all goes back to the original series and the first few movies they did in the 80’s. My Mom told me my love for space science fiction actually began when my parents took me to the drive in to watch ‘ET’ in 1982 when I was 2. Apparently I stayed up for the entire movie glued to the screen the entire time, shortly thereafter was when I probably discovered ‘Star Trek’ and ‘Star Wars’.

 

Although I am a ‘Trekkie’ I have from time to time stopped watching Star Trek shows due to issues I had with them. Back in 1997 I stopped watching ‘Star Trek: Voyager’ halfway through season 3. At that time I had issues with some of the logic associated with the premise of the series. How can Voyager sustain extreme damage from the Kazon in one episode then in the next episode it is clean and pristine? Voyager is literally 70+ years away from the nearest Federation space dock, cut off from the engineers and materials required to repair the ship… Then in season 4 it became the ‘Borg Babe and funny hologram Doctor Show’. I’ve gone back and watched some of the episodes I missed but I’ve never watched the entire series, yet I consider myself a Trekkie. Just because you are a fan of a franchise doesn’t mean you have to accept mediocre storytelling. I knew before ‘Voyager’ even launched that the premise of a Starfleet vessel being lost in space 75 years from the Federation was a doomed concept. To their credit they played out the premise for the entire 7 year run but I think it would have been better to see this show take place in Federation space. There are always plenty of stories to tell in the Alpha quadrant.

‘Enterprise’ (later wisely renamed ‘Star Trek: Enterprise’) was another example of me dropping off of a Trek series. In season 3 they started a ‘Xindi’ war story arc which I did not care for so I stopped watching. If Earth had been attacked by this unknown ‘Xindi’ race and they intended to use their version of the ‘Death Star’ on Earth why was this never refereed to or mentioned before in the original series, TNG, DS9 or Voyager? Enterprise is after all a prequel series and that is the root of what makes it a flawed series. If the NX-01 Enterprise really is the first Federation ship again why was this not ever mentioned in the previous Trek series or movies?

Prequels; when not executed with continuity in mind are doomed to suck. Enterprise at times ignored established Trek continuity and suffered as a result; likewise with ‘Star Trek: Discovery’. Say what you will about the ‘Star Wars’ prequels at least creator George Lucas had it (for the most part) planned out to work with the continuity he had already established with the original trilogy. Discovery, more so than Enterprise, completely ignores continuity and relies on special effects, lens flares, macguffins, and lazy writing to tell their stories while at the same time completely ignoring established continuity.  So far ‘Star Trek: Picard’ is doing a better job at working with established continuity and doing a better job weaving the story they are telling.

Bottom line I wish ‘Star Trek’ would simply return to their roots. And no I do not mean they should reboot Captain Kirk or Captain Pike yet again (sorry Anson Mount, love you as Captain Pike but I really don’t need a show with that character), but rather a new show with a new crew, new cast, new ship but same mission as the original series. A Starfleet ship in the 25^th century that goes on missions every week to “Seek out new life and new civilizations; to boldly go where no one has gone before”.

 

Sorry Michelle Yeoh but I am not looking forward to the proposed ‘Section 31’ series. I want more “Star Trek” in my STAR TREK.  

 

 

 

Vul-Con 2019???

Vulcan is a town in the prairies of southern Alberta, Canada, within Vulcan County. It is located on Highway 23, midway between the cities of Calgary and Lethbridge. The town has been recognized by CBS (whom owns 'Star Trek') as the 'Star Trek Capital of Canada'. AND Vul-Con is an annual 'Star Trek' convention organized by Vulcan tourism. The original convention coincided with the annual town fair called 'Spock Days' and was held in June. But in 2016 the Star Trek convention was moved from 'Spock Days' to its own weekend in July and rebranded 'Vul-Con'. This was due in large part because 'Spock Days' was already a big fair with most of the locals attending fair activities and a large slow-pitch ball tournament. With the fair, ball tournament AND a 'Star Trek' convention occurring on the same weekend things got crowded and accommodations were scarce and campgrounds were at capacity.

 

I have been going to Vul-Con (Spock Days convention) since 2013 and I am not impressed with the organization of the con these last 2 years. I know there have been some reorganizational changes within Vulcan Tourism with new people running things, so it can be a confusing and daunting task going in new and organizing a convention. But this convention is a boost to the local economy every year it is successful and would grow based on its success. Once word gets out this convention is not to the high standards they achieved 2013 through 2017 people are going to stay away and go elsewhere for their holidays and that money they would have brought and spent in Vulcan will go elsewhere. Last year was TERRIBLE and so far things are not looking any better. I liked going when there was actual show stars, guest stars (of significance) and behind the scenes crew people that actually played big parts in making the shows (like Rick Sternbach and Ira Steven Behr). I really don’t care if I meet the guy who was in the Gorn costume in TOS (he might be a great guy and all but not on my fanboy list of people to meet), or a guy from Germany who looks like Spock. And to make matters worse currently the tickets for the convention are not available for purchase online yet...

I plan my summer holiday around this event and when I’m down there I spend a lot of money in the local economy (room, food, vendors, stores, etc). If  I am to come to Vulcan and invest my time and money as a tourist it needs to be worth my while. A lot of my friends who have attended in years past also share my concerns. I know the next guest being announced is Tracee Cocco, who was a background actress/ stunt woman on TNG and the TNG films (but I don’t think she had any lines except maybe “Aye sir”). There is a fourth guest being announced on the 15th of May. If it’s an actual cast regular or producer I might still go... depending on who it is. 

Tracee Cocco

It’s just sad to see how the quality of this con has declined so quickly. Plus according to the convention event poster releases on line you now have to buy a VIP ticket to attend the Q&A’s... that would be a deal breaker right there for me. Q&A’s should be available for everyone who pays for a ticket, with the VIP’s getting front row seating (as it’s always been). 

Hopefully things turn around. It would be a damn shame to see this convention turn into a mere shadow of its former self. In the years I've been going they have had Odo, Kira, The Doctor (Robert Picardo), Neelix, Chakotay, Garek, Gowron, Jake Sisko (just to name a few)... and now we are getting the guy who wore the Gorn costume? We are getting a guy from Germany who is a Spock look-a-like?

 

 

Star Trek Disaster (oops I meant ‘Discovery’…)

Cadet Tilley. One of the characters from 'Disco' I think is great (if at times a little annoying)

 

Before I begin let me say I want Star Trek, whether it is a TV series or movie to be good.  I am a lifelong fan and I want the franchise I love to do good things. Unfortunately early on in season one of ‘Discovery’ I realized things were not going the way I felt it should have. We were told this would be a prequel series and would be in established Star Trek continuity and would be respectful to what came before. That clearly did not happen as evident with the use of the Klingons, the retcon of Spock having a human foster sister, the spore drive system (Voyager sure could have used that “old” technology in the 24^th century), the mirror universe angle, Section 31 is a “secret” organization that EVERYONE seems to know about… and the flaws go on and on. Sonequa Martin-Greene (aka SMG, previously from her NON-ground-breaking role on ‘The Walking Dead’) plays Michael Burnham who is a mutinous Starfleet officer whom helped start the war between the Klingon Empire and the Federation, don’t worry all gets forgiven for some reason. The rest of the “crew” are essentially background characters to her with the exception of Captain Lorca (later Pike), Commander Saru and Cadet Tilley, the chief engineer and doctor are there too. Add inconsistent pacing, tons of lens flares, special effects orgies, endless Deus Ex Machina to solve problems for the characters and situations, continuity errors galore, bad acting by SMG and this show is just a terrible mess of a series. People have pointed out that TNG had a terrible first 2 seasons but at least series lead Patrick Stewart (Picard) could act the hell out of what he was given to work with, can’t say the same for SMG. And speaking of TNG needing 2 seasons before it got good: I would argue TNG had more to contend with behind the scenes that caused them to suffer creatively such as a rotating writing staff, a Hollywood writers’ strike, limited budget and technology to utilize for the show (this was the 80’s after all, not much CGI in those days…) and so on. Star Trek Discovery has the benefit of hindsight and technologies that can help tell their stories and not limit them, etc.

L to R: Stamots, Saru, Ash Klingon, Beardy "Spock, unknown guy, unknown gal, unknown guy, unknown weird eyed gal hidden behind Tilley, Tilley

 

I am a Star Trek fan and I do want it to be good and do well. In the past TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT all had bad episodes and did suffer from time to time creatively. But not like this, not the way DISCO is suffering. It is consistently bad with too many cooks in the kitchen (Disco: 21 Producers with 8 of them being Executive Producers as compared to TNG season 2 : 8 Producers with 3 of them as Executive Producers).

Disco’s 2^nd season was a slight improvement over the first but not by much. Anson Mount was great as Captain Christopher Pike but sadly he will be gone in season 3, and judging by interviews given he doesn’t seem anxious to return to Trek any time soon. That’s just my opinion after seeing some interviews and the words/body language he used.

Admiral Forgettable and Anson Mount as 'Captain Pike'

 

Maybe the Captain Picard series will be good…there is always hope and hope is all we have.

 

 

Done with Discovery: Talos 4 Don’t Go There

I've had my misgivings with ‘Star Trek Discovery’ since it is premiere in 2017 and I knew that going the prequel route was not a good idea. Star Trek had already tried this in 2001 with ‘Star Trek Enterprise’ and it was cancelled after four seasons. I think part of the problem with Enterprise was the fact that diehard fans were dropping off due to continuity issues. For example I stopped watching Enterprise during season three because of the whole Xindi war story. This alien race brought a small death star-like weapon that cut a strip through North America, and yet this was never mentioned or referenced in any of the 4 Star Trek series that came before Enterprise. So when Discovery was announced that it was going to be a prequel I knew there was going to be continuity issues. And the continuity issues have been numerous and dumbfounding to a lot of diehard fans such as myself. But what they're going to be doing next week is too much for me to handle and I am seriously done with this series. 

A story arc that has never been touched on or referenced since it originally aired on the original series has been Talos 4. The story with Talos 4 originally aired in the two-part episode ‘The Menagerie’, Which was the story of how Captain Christopher Pike ended up living the rest of his life on the planet. It's an arc that concluded and the residents of Talos 4 have never been seen or heard from since; now for some reason Star Trek Discovery is going back to Talos 4.

Why? Why must we go back to the storyline that was resolved over 50 years ago. Why must Star Trek Discovery continue to screw with continuity? I'm getting so sick of this happening with this series. I've stuck with it during season two because of Cadet Tilly, Saru, and Anson Mount (from ‘Hell on Wheels’) as Captain Pike. But in all honesty Sonique Martin Green and her character ‘Michael Burnham’ are terrible. It just blows my mind that this character committed an act of mutiny and now is somehow redeemed and continues to be a part of this crew? That just confuses me to no end. 

I've mentioned this before in my previous blog post but I feel the biggest problem plaguing this show is the fact that there is 21 producers working on it, eight of them are Executive Producers. Compare eight Executive producers on Star Trek Discovery to 3 Executive Producers on Star Trek The Next Generation at any given time. Clearly there are too many cooks in this kitchen who have no idea what the recipe is to create a good Star Trek series. And I've heard a few people use the argument that Rod Roddenberry is one of those Executive Producers and my retort is: who cares? Just because his father created the franchise doesn't mean he's an expert on that franchise. If you go back and watch the documentary he did a few years ago about his father you will see that he himself will admit he was not a Star Trek fan for many years. But just like a born-again Christian who's found Jesus and now goes around preaching the gospel to anyone who listened people seem to think that Rod Roddenberry is the second coming. Trust me folks he is not, no offence to him but just because he shares his father's last name doesn't make him an expert. 

And speaking of experts my question to CBS is why don't they bring in some Star Trek experts? For example they could ask Rick Berman on how to make a Star Trek series since he helped to produce and create 4 Star Trek series. Or maybe ask Michael and Denise Okuda for their input; they are after all the authors of the Star Trek Encyclopedia and the Star Trek Chronology books. Or maybe they could ask some Star Trek novelists such as Michael Jan Friedman or Peter David for their input. 

Lately I found watching ‘Discovery’ a chore to get through. For example on the last episode I actually fell asleep watching it as I was bored. When I awoke I went back and re-wound the last 10 or 15 minutes of the show so I could find out what I missed and that's when the whole Talos 4 reveal occurred. For me that was the final straw, that's when I came to the conclusion that I could no longer try to get through this series, I simply have to drop it. 

In all honesty this isn't the first time that I've dropped a Star Trek series. As I mentioned earlier I was not a big fan of Star Trek Enterprise in its third season and I never watched it. I came back in season four because I was reading very positive things about it and the episodes that I did watch I really enjoyed, and I really felt that they were going in a better direction with the series but unfortunately it was canceled. I even stopped watching Star Trek Voyager halfway through its third season. I came back periodically for the remainder of the Voyager run but ever so periodically. In all honesty I've probably only watched half of the Star Trek Voyager episodes. My reasons for not being a fan of Voyager are numerous and could probably take up its own blog post but suffice to say I really liked the actors on that series; I just wasn't a fan of the premise, the writing, and the direction it ultimately took. 

In 2019 thankfully we have an alternative to Star Trek Discovery and it is called ‘The Orville’. It really does feel like what a Star Trek series should be. It's funny, it's lighthearted, the characters are relatable, and it is more of a ‘positive vision of the future’ than Discovery is. I found that in its second season it has matured and become a better show unlike its current Star Trek counterpart. So I'll be sticking with ‘The Orville’ for the for seeable future which I hope will be many seasons to come. 

And I do have my fingers crossed for the Captain Picard series that is supposed to be later in 2019. Patrick Stewart is a very talented actor and a very smart man, and I really don't believe he would get involved with a TV series if it wasn't going to be of high quality, so I'm very hopeful for that series. Also that series is going to be a sequel to Star Trek Nemesis rather than another prequel to Star Trek The Original Series. Enough for the prequel's already, we need to quit making trips to the well; sequel is where it's at. 

Even more continuity errors in Star Trek Discovery

***SPOILERS*** In the latest episode of STD ‘Saints of Imperfection’ we once again bear witness to more blatant continuity errors.  

The group ‘Section 31’ was first established in 1996 on ST: Deep Space Nine as a covert Federation organization that was part of the original starfleet charter and had existed in secret for over 200 years (at that point). So much secretive that the high ranking officers of DS9 had no idea who they were or that they even existed. 

Now in this latest episode of STD Emperor Georgio (Michelle Yeoh) comes onboard Discovery and flashes her fancy Section 31 insignia to Captain Pike and Burnham and Pike responds to her and acknowledges Section 31 as if he is fully aware of who they are and what they do. Pike even has a conversation with an old buddy who commands Georgio. Now with STD being a prequel series and Section 31 established as being top secret >100 years before STD on ST:Enterprise and 100+ years after on ST:DS9 how could anyone know who or what Section 31 is during the time period of STD? 

Again this is one of the many problems plaguing STD: 

CONTINUITY ERRORS!!!!!

Can anyone at the STD writers room do some research please????

I keep watching in the hopes this series will get better. Anson Mount is great as Captain Pike, Cadet Tilley and Commander Saru are also great...and that’s about it. The handling of Section 31 is just another example of a creative mis-fire. It’s my hope that someone at the current Star Trek offices just comes out and admits that this series is its own continuity and nothing else that happened before on the other Star Trek series matters. 

I think an admittance of that would relieve a lot of stress that established Star Trek fans (like myself) have been feeling while watching STD. Remember that the producers have been stating all along that STD is in continuity and that they would be respectful of what came before, which they clearly are not... 

Star Trek Discovery, season 2 episode 1 mini review

For the record I do consider myself a ‘Star Trek’ fan and have been so most of my life. However that being said I’ve never been a blindly loyal fan either. If Star Trek did or was doing something I didn’t like I would criticize and abandon ship so to speak as a fan. For example I am not a fan of Star Trek V, also known as ‘Shatners Flop’. I quit watching Star Trek: Voyager half way through season 3. I did go back and watch some Voyager again in season 4 and 5 but then dropped it due to bad writing and bad creative decisions they were making. I stopped watching Star Trek: Enterprise during season 3’s ‘Xindi War’ because the continuity ramifications were just mind boggling for me, I did however return in season 4. And now with Star Trek: Discovery I have gone on record as saying it is not my cup of tea during season one. 

Finally finished episode one of season two of Star Trek Discovery. Anston Mount, Doug Jones and Mary Wiseman were fantastic as always. Other than that it kinda was a boring episode in my view and the action was very Star Wars-ish. The ‘this technology isn’t working so we have to do this’ and ‘that technology isn’t working so we have to do that’ trope is eye rolling. 

With special effects technology being as good and affordable as it is today the writers tend to write lazily as compared to twenty+ years ago. Instead of focusing on high stakes tech scenes I would prefer more grounded character drama, especially when they have such a good actor like Anston Mount now a cast member. 

But I keep telling myself as long as people are watching and enjoying it that’s a good thing. And as long as I also think of this series as being out of what I think of as “Star Trek continuity” I am able to enjoy it more. Because let’s face it these writers are not writing for continuity...

Keeping my fingers crossed for the Captain Picard series. 

Section 31 Star Trek series

People are so hung up on the notion Star Trek is a positive vision of the future. But it has not always been...

Not my cup of tea

As a Star Trek fan I have been asked a lot lately if I like the new TV series: Star Trek Discovery. And being an honest person I answer honestly: Not really. Now there are definitely some things I do like about it such as the characters of Commander Saru and Cadet Tilley, but other than that I just am not a fan of this series. It seems some are under the mistaken impression that as a ‘Star Trek Fan’ you must like all things Star Trek. This is simply not true. You can like a franchise but doesn’t mean you must like everything in that franchise. For example you can like Coca Cola and not like New Coke (80’s kids will get that reference) or you can like Pepsi but not like Crystal Pepsi (90’s reference). When people ask me to go into detail why I don’t like the new series I have some main points I share:

-          When the producers pitched this series they said it would tie into established continuity and not change things. This simply did not happen. For example the Klingon look, language and culture seemed to be completely different than in previous continuity. If they had just said “This is a reboot of the franchise” I’d have been alright with that. Reboot it and do what you like, but when you go out of your way to say nothing will be changed then it is…I have a problem with that.

 

-          The previous Trek series were about the crew and being a team/family. Granted in the original 60’s series it originally was all about Kirk, and then as the popularity of Spock and McCoy grew it became more about the three of them. But the supporting cast all contributed in some way to give the viewer a sense of comradery, but this new series is about Michael Burnham, Saru, Tilley, Engineer guy…there’s no real sense of team/family here.  Most of the bridge crew has so far remained nameless

 

 

-          Lens flares, Admirals hiding in shadows as they speak, focus on ship redesigns and special effects…this new show has the look and feel of the JJ Abrams ‘Star Trek’ films (2009-2016) and not the previous Star Trek TV series.

 

I could go on but I’ve said my peace. I’m not saying YOU will not like this show, YOU just might. This could be the Trek series you have been waiting for. But for me it’s just not my cup of tea. I’ll watch season 2 (coming in January 2019) and I am holding out hope that the new Captain Picard series will be good (coming out in late 2019)

Rethinking our Thinking: Bullying in the Science Fiction Community

Unfortunately the way I see it the utopian/socialist future that is depicted within the Star Trek franchise will never come to pass. It's simply human nature to want to be better than your neighbor, to be superior to others in some way shape or form. And because of that nature I honestly believe we will never achieve Gene Roddenberry's vision he had for a better future for humanity. Now don't get me wrong I would love to live in that type of future: where someone is not limited by their financial situation, ethnicity, or any of the other numerous things that hold people back now a days. But I just can't see human nature changing as dramatically as it is portrayed in Star Trek. There is always going to be bullies that live among us, people whose instinct it is to push others down to make themselves superior.

As science fiction fans we tend to have a reputation for being nice people, but unfortunately that is misleading as there are many bullies in the science fiction community. Recently I've had to deal with one of these people, someone whom I thought was a nice person was actually a wolf wearing sheep's clothes.

Now I've never been one to shy away from my opinion, especially nowadays with the invention of social media, and it being so readily available for anyone to share their opinions on, I choose to do that. I also write a blog which I update several times a month, where I give reviews and insights into the things that I am reading, watching or doing, but my opinions are just that: MY opinions. Also for years I used to offer my opinions and insights on the various Podcasts that I was a part of. But as a general rule I don't impose my opinions on anyone, and I try my best to respect other people's opinions (unless they are completely out to lunch for example if they involve racism). But sometimes it does get hard being a science fiction fan and just being a person when you're dealing with bullies. Bullies that demand that their opinions mean more than yours; one area where you see this a lot is in sports.

“My team is better than yours” Is a phrase that is often tossed around between sports fan rivals. People are passionate about the teams and players for which they cheer for so much so that this rivalry that exists between fans of opposing teams sometimes escalates into violence. An obvious example that comes to mind is the soccer (football) riots that sometimes occur around the world. But what comes to my mind recently with myself is a debate I had with a gentleman who is a Calgary fan. You see I'm in Edmonton fan: Edmonton Oilers (hockey) and Edmonton Eskimos (Canadian Football). For as long as I can remember being an Edmonton fan has always been an important part of my life. Growing up I remember watching the Oilers win their five Stanley Cups, and I watched the Eskimos win several Grey Cups. But if you're a Calgary fan I can see it being hard to dispute an Edmonton fan considering Calgary has so many fewer cups than their Edmonton rivals (Edmonton Stanley Cups: 5. Calgary: 1. Edmonton Grey Cups: 14. Calgary 7). When I pointed out Edmontons superior statistics to this “gentleman” Calgary fan his response was vulgarity. Instead of coming up with an intelligent argument or retort his response was to simply call me names and get ignorant. He told me that he hated people from Edmonton and their fans, and he also told me to “eat a bag of dicks”. I tried my hardest to debate him on an intellectual level but that was beyond him and he resorted to bullying in order to defend his team and his “honour” as he saw it. I have since removed him as a Facebook “friend”. Ironically I also was attacked on social media by this same person for my views on Star Trek Discovery.

I ‘friended’ this Individual because he has been a moderator at a science fiction convention that I frequent. He seemed like a nice person when I met him, but once he began commenting on some of my Facebook posts I became aware of his negativity and his bullying tendencies. I did a review of ‘Star Trek Discovery’ on my blog which I posted to my social media accounts. Put simply I am not a fan of the new Star Trek series. When this series was originally proposed the creators promised fans that the show would be in continuity, and be respectful to the history of Star Trek that came before it. But right out of the gate, right with episode one it was clear that the creators were rewriting history to suit their own purposes. Ignoring years of continuity the creators of the new show did what they wanted to do. Which I'm fine with had they said that from the beginning. If they had told us that they were rebooting the show, retooling it the way that they saw fit in order to tell the stories that they wanted to tell I would've been fine with that, I wouldn't have been happy but I would be fine with it. But the fact that they went out of their way to assure Star Trek fans that they were not going to change continuity and then they did change continuity: I had a problem with that. Obvious examples being: Spock’s human sister, the look and behaviour of the Klingons, the look of warp drive, etc...are all things that were changed within Star Trek continuity for this new series. So when I shared my views on social media this gentleman immediately blasted me for my opinion. But as I said this guy is a moderator at conventions and I know he has met several stars of the new Star Trek series. So to say that he has a vested interest in singing the praises of the new Star Trek series would be a fair statement I think. So instead of respecting my opinion on the show and accepting it for what it is, MY OPINION, he took to blast me for my opinion on social media, again at time using vulgarity to get his point across. I was made to look and feel like an idiot because I didn't share his positive view on the new Star Trek.

The way I see things if you like the new Star Trek series that's fine. I identify as a lifelong fan of the franchise but even prior to the new series I did have some issues with some of the other series that took place. I had issues with Star Trek Enterprise, and I had issues with Star Trek Voyager. I even had some issues with the first couple seasons of Star Trek The Next Generation, so although I do consider myself a “Star Trek fan” I don't like everything that has ever been produced by the franchise. But for some reason when it comes to this new Star Trek series it seems that the people that don't like it are ridiculed and shit on by the fans of the new series. Actually it's not some reason, I think I know the reason why this happens. It's because this is the first Star Trek series to take place AFTER social media has become so prominent in our lives. So the fact of the matter is these bullies that are showing themselves within social media have probably always been there all along, they just never had a forum from which to spread their hate like they have now.

There is a 'Babylon 5' group I am a member of on Facebook. It was a science fiction television series that was on the airwaves from 1993-1998. It was a great series and way ahead of its time; so when I found this group on Facebook that loved that series as much as I did I was initially excited. Then as time went on (and Trump became President) this group became a forum for the Republican party of the United States. Some of these fans of Babylon 5 are now using this forum to preach Trump ideals and hatred, most posts nowadays have absolutely nothing to do with the B5 television series. And when others speak out against the right wing views expressed by these people they are bullied. I have since ignored this group but stay attached to it because there are some good people on there that I do like to hear from.

When attending a comic con in 2014 I was surprised to see a sign posted in various areas of the venue:

So these signs were posted because it seems some within the science fiction fandom thought it was alright to touch others inappropriatly because of the costumes they were wearing. To me its just common sense that if a woman is dressed as 'Slave Leia' doesn't mean I have the right to grab her ass or tits. Again this is common sense...or so I thought. But these signs had to be created in order to inform those individuals that their behaviour will not be tolerated. I wonder how many of these people are also among the bullies I speak of?

It just makes me sad to see fandom represented this way. For years science-fiction fans were seen as friendly and tolerant towards one another. They seemed to be respectful of each other's opinions but now it seems we're no different than sports fans or any other group where bullying, inappropriate behaviour and intolerance is allowed to grow and flourish.

Sad days indeed.

When 'Star Trek' re-invents itself...

Back in 1989 we Star Trek fans were introduced to a new ultimate villain in the Trek Universe, they were called 'The Borg'. They are a race hive mind which assimilates other races and technologies whether they like it or not. They threaten to end our individuality and turn us all into mindless drones as part of their overall collective. Its a scary thought to lose ones own individuality which makes the Borg perhaps the scariest of all the Trek alien races. 

But in this post I am discussing how from time to time Star Trek likes to take what works and change it anyway with most times terrible results. Long before JJ Abrams and the creators of 'Star Trek Discovery' reinvented the Klingons the Borg were reinvented. And like the new Klingons they took something that worked and made it worse: 

Klingon design 1979-2005

Klingons 2018

Now the Borg looked good in their initial use from 1989-1995. They were emotionless yet they had a underrated scariness about them :

Now with the film 'Star Trek: First Contact' the Borg were reinvented to be angry zombie like villains. They seemed to be something more out of a horror film than a science fiction one:

And I also found this chart online which apparently explains the differences in the Borg:

Put simply there was nothing wrong with the Borg. They did not need to be re-invented but were for some reason that escapes me. And it continues today with the new Star Trek movies and series. I'm a firm believer that if something is not broken do not try to fix it. I really do not want to see anymore aliens reimagined in future Trek installments. Star Trek is starting to not feel like Star Trek anymore

:(

Pop Culture Hindsight Blog #1: Star Trek The JJ Abrams Films

To set the record straight I must admit I am not a fan of the JJ Abrams 'Star Trek' films. Aside from Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban playing 'Spock' and 'McCoy' I was not too impressed. Initially I was; I think it was because of the lack of Trek there had been for so many years. From 2005-2009 there was no Trek series or movies and I has hungry for new adventures. After watching the first 2009 film I was happy to see Trek back; but then as time went on I became less and less thrilled with what Abrams and company was doing with the franchise.

Here's some things I had problems with and what I would have done differently:

- Khan blood: Cure for the common death???
So when I was watching 'Into Darkness' for the first (and last) time I was blown away with their decision to kill off Captain Kirk (SPOILERS). I remember thing "Wow. What a brave choice. I can't wait to see where they take the films from here!". Not to worry because after several minutes Captain Kirk was saved from death by a transfusion of Khans blood. Yep they brought a man back from the dead by simply injecting his dead body with genetically engineered blood. I'm sorry but this is way to far fetched for science fiction. If Khans blood can bring people back from the dead why didn't they use it on Admiral Marcus? Or why do they not mass replicate his magic blood so no one ever dies ever again? This was such a brain dead plot twist that should never have been allowed to take place. Either kill Kirk or don't just don't insult our intelligence.

- Recasting new actors to play iconic roles
They got it right with Quinto and Urban but other than that the casting sucked. Chris Pine was a passable Kirk but lacked the charm and charisma of William Shatner. The guy who played Sulu...George Takei is Japanese and this new guy is Korean. Chekov isn't even the right age to be at the academy with the others. Uhura was never so horny and having her with Spock just seemed wrong to me. I love Simon Pegg but he's no James Doohan. Benedict Cumberbatch is an amazing actor but all his talents went to waste when it was revealed he was playing Khan. You simply cannot recast Ricardo Montalban. It would have been so much better if Cumberbatch played an all-new villain that he can make his own with his amazing acting talents but instead it was all wasted on a character who clearly was not Khan to a die hard fan like myself.

- Lens Flare....not needed. Stop it JJ, just stop it!

- The look of the Enterprise
It looked like they filmed the interior of the Enterprise in a Apple Store. Also since when did the Enterprise have all these huge tanks/vats in Engineering? Is this a starship or a brewery? In fact they filmed those scenes at an actual brewery.

__________________

I have more nitpicking to do on these movies but that will have to wait for another day...